About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5
and prepared them for use in aerial bombs. these reports suggests that assad's forces are waiting for orders. if true, these reports may mean that the united states and our allies are facing the prospect of use of weapons of mass destruction in syria and this may be the last warning we get. time for talking about what to do may now be coming to a close and we may be left with an awful and very difficult decision. whether to continue on the said lines and hope that a man who has slaughtered nearly 40,000 men, women and children in syria will decide not to take the next step and use far more destructive weapons to kill significantly larger numbers of people, whether to take military action of some kind that could prevent a mass atrocity. if that is the choice we now face, it is a grave and sobering decision and would put the starkest expression on the failure of the administration's policy towards syria. savage and unfair fight, this raged now for nearly two years. the longer this conflict has gone, the worse it has gotten. all of those who argued for non intervention because of the things tha
on the skilled work force or how much there is a skill gap, i think this is a critical issue. i think that for us to have clear policies, we need to do a little better in clearly defining the challenge. first of all, i don't think there is any question that the main reason we are having higher unemployment right now is not structural. it is fundamentally cyclical, fundamentally the lack of demand that is still in our economy as we recover from the great recession. that said, that awareness, that recognition that ben bernanke and former cea sheriff lazar -- cea chair lazear should not undermine that we face temporary or futures skills gaps but there is three reasons we should be focused on this. number one, even the unemployment today that is fundamentally about cyclical demand can easily become the next structural skills problem of the future. we know that one of the challenges we face right now in our economy is not just lowering unemployment, but lower and long-term unemployment, and that if we allow regions of our fellow citizens to stay unemployed for year or two years or longer, we know from
just how nonlife- u.s. unemployment benefits are. a lot of the against -- non- lavish u.s. unemployment benefits are. the two countries that he mentioned, the netherlands and belgium, they're doing much better than other continental european countries. the scandinavian countries have guest: there is not this simple relationship that have been extensive unemployment insurance system and you mechanically generate a higher unemployment rate. host: lisa from dallas, texas, received unemployment insurance -- nate from dallas, texas, receives unemployment insurance. caller: right now i lost my job because my boss was fired from the university. and recently got my doctoral degree from that university, and i am spending eight hours a day on the computer, trying to network. i want to buck the contention that it is a mismatch of skills between the employer and the people that are unemployed. there was a recent "wall street journal" saying that part of the problem is how employers conduct searches of candidates, and her recruiting is done. -- how recruiting is done. i think the unemployment benefi
.d.p. if we fail to act. this is why many of us have called for action. it was six years ago this month that senator greg and i first came up with a commission to address the debt. that eventually led to the president naming the simpson bowles commission. -- its part son report bipartisan report recommended 40 trillion in deficit reduction. we need to stabilize the debt and work it down is a package of about $4 trillion over ten years. here we are today, december 19, and these law changes which i referenced earlier, the end of the bush era tax cuts, the dreaded sequester, across the board cuts of $1.2 trillion in spending will begin to take effect the first of next year. the good news is the white house and republicans have been trading proposals and at least yesterday appeared to be moving closer together. i would have much preferred that they would be talking about a bigger package than they've discussed but nonetheless to reach a package that would resolve some of these issues would be an important step forward and i think help promote certainty that would be important to our economy
-class families. the wealthiest among us can help us reduce the debt by paying more. it is encouraging to see republican members of the house and the senate speak out on the need or a deficit approach that includes raising taxes on wealthy individuals and to moving right away to ensure that 98% of families do not race a tax increase. we need to look -- do not face a tax increase. we need to look at history. what we saw in the 1990s and 2000s, there was no relationship between lower marginal tax rates for the wealthiest among us an economic growth. first during the clinton administration, the top marginal tax rate was raised on the wealthiest individuals and the economy grew at its fastest rate in a generation. it added more than 22 million jobs. during the following eight years, the top marginal rate dax tax rate was lower, but economy never regained its strength from the reviews decade. middle-class families are vulnerable when the recession began at the end of 2007. i hope this hearing is helpful not just in this hearing, but across this country to people who are watching and waiting for co
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)